Presentazione di PowerPoint

1
Experiences and side results from the 3DE
project Dante Del Corso COREP/Politecnico
di Torino - Italy From the Vision to the
Outcomes Concertation meeting Luxembourg,
January 2003
2
Contents

• 3DE Design, Development, and Delivery
  Electronic Environment for Educational MultiMedia
• Project goals and structure
• The Vision
• The real Outcomes
• Critical points
• Technical
• Organization
• The lessons
• Unexpected bonus

3
Project structure

• 3 Y, from March 2000
• 4 partners
• COREP (IT) Coordination,
• Consorzio per la Ricerca e lEducazione
  Permanente
• ARDEMI (FR)
• Association pour la Recherche-Développement de
  lEnseignement Multimédia et Interactif
• STI (ES)
• Sistemas y Tratamiento de Informacion SA
• VAASA POLYTECHNIC (FIN)
• University with experience on pedagogy.

4
Vision 1 remove constraints
5
Vision 2 get results

• Take into account personal learning style
• improve the results of the learning process.
• Handle many different learners (1004 !)
• Increase the self-awareness of the learner,
• associate to learning units explicit pedagogy
• Modularity, reuse, metadata
• Keep acceptable cost
• use mostly automated tools for course assembly
• Makes possible to create personal courses
• guarantee correctness by construction
• Course compiler with pedagogical DRC (Design Rule
  Checker)
• higher educational effectivness means lower
  life-cycle cost

6
Design, Development, and Delivery Electronic
Environment for Educational MultiMedia
People are different
Deliver
3DE deliver them compiled courses adapted to
their learning style.
7
Final vision a world of learners

• Learners have different needs and goals

• How to match with learning units ?

8
Final vision the 3DE role

• The powerful set of 3DE tools builds the best
  matching courses

3DE tools
9
The real outcome

• The pool is not so wide
• The learners have also other needs
• 3DE builds almost best courses

3DE tools
10
Critical points

• Technical
• authoring
• terminology
• pedagogical effectivness
• Organization
• interest of universities vs companies
• workplan and deadlines
• Both come from unverified assumptions

11
Critical point authoring

• Learning units are prepared by authors
• Authors too have teaching styles
• Use of several authors is mandatory

authors
12
Critical point terminology

• Added value of 3DE
• Integrate work from different authors
• describe prerequisites/results with common terms
  across the various authors
• First step define (or choose) a taxonomy
• Heavily understimated effort
• Wrong assumption
• Words have the same meaning for different people

13
Critical point pedagogy

• Improvement in pedagogical effectivness resulting
  from customization
• Is it true ? How much improvement ?
• How to measure it ?
• From E-learning to I-learning (Integrated
  learning)
• E-learning services people
• Unverified assumptions
• Customization means better learning
• E-learning is always good

14
Universities, Companies, and ...

• Universities
• interested in research
• a paper is the result
• Companies
• interest in cost/benefits
• minimum results which comply with the contract
• Reviewers
• ask for tangible results scientific validity

15
Critical point timing

• Problems common to all large projects
• Deadlines slip
• Discover delays as soon as possible
• Frequent check points
• Establish and keep tight and frequent
  communication (chat, )
• Delays in Commission responses
• not an excuse to delay the work
• Wrong assumption
• the project is THE top interest for all partners

16
Unexpected bonus

• Cooperation with other projects
• start of new project proposals
• Cooperation from people outside the project
• request to use 3DE approach in other courses
• Increased involvement in standards
• Side developements
• Metadata tool
• Awareness of technology limits
• from E-learning to I-learning

17
More information

• 3DE project website www.3deproject.com